Exposing the underbelly of Armstrongism in all of its wacky glory! Nothing you read here is made up. Every crazy, weird and wacky quote is straight from the pens of Armstrongite leaders or members who think they possess some insight into God and the Bible. What you read here is the up to date face of Herbert W Armstrong's legacy. It's the gritty and dirty behind the scenes look at Armstrongism as you have never seen it before!

Thursday, March 15, 2018

Sabbath Sex Is WRONG! And so is Passover Sex and Holy Day Sex!!!!!!!!!!!

As I mentioned in the dating post below, the Church of God has made a business out of meddling in its member's lives. Sex has been a high priority of church leaders for decades. Who can ever forget the incessant obsession Rod Meredith had with sex! Or Ted Armstrong, who one day would be denouncing premarital sex and the next would be fornicating with unmarried students and the next with ministers wives. And then there was God Speaks Out On The New Morality book by Herbert Armstrong, which was later revised as The Missing Dimension in Sex. Both were filled with provocative illustrations because Church members were too stupid to know how to have "godly" sex and needed to be shown how. Even with both books filled with Victorian ideals that HWA grew up with, never once did they condemn sex on the Sabbath.That doesn't matter to some select few in Armstrongism who have a deep aversion to sex. They feel the need to stick their sweaty palms into the sex lives of members. The Chief Pharisee and bastardizer of the law James Malm has now spoken out about sex on the Sabbath, Passover night and high days.For those of you who like to be frisky on those days, you will need to now strap on the chastity belts and take cold showers.

Sex on Passover, Sabbath and High Days

The man and woman were created without sin and it was only AFTER sin entered, that Sacrifices, a High Priest Intercessor and the Law of Clean and Unclean were instituted.

Even then, there were clean and unclean animals, but the further details only began at Sinai with God’s detailed instructions for Israel and a PHYSICAL priesthood.

If one considers the laws given to Israel one cannot help but come to the conclusion that it is physically impossible to avoid becoming unclean for more than a very short time.

A woman can be absolutely perfect yet she cannot overcome the female nature [natural cycle], a man can be absolutely perfect yet he cannot prevent an emission even if he restrains himself otherwise.

This is meant to teach us that the physical state of man once Adam and Eve had sinned is antithetical to godliness, and only God can make us spiritually clean washing away our sins. Romans 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

In practical terms; yes, let a man and his wife enjoy each other to the full, but refrain from sex on High Days and Sabbaths [and on the Appointed Time of Passover day] so as to be clean on Holy Time. This principle is presented when God commanded Israel to refrain from their wives for three days before Pentecost at Sinai (Ex 19:50).

I have been in error on this point in the past and I now realize that it is proper to rest from sex on the Passover, Sabbaths and High Days. This is not a burden since one can prepare on Friday afternoon and before High Days and wash before the Sabbaths begin.

In other words, have sex all you want Friday afternoon and then wash up before sundown. Seriously? Preparation Day sex, who knew?

It does not take long, thanks to the Internet, to look up as to how the Jews look upon sex on the Sabbath and other holy days. A person will quickly see that no matter how much James Malm bastardizes the law to his own interpretations or how much he pretends to be a "Christianized" Jew, he is neither.

Here is one Jewish interpretation:

The practices of physically indulging by having intercourse on the Sabbath may be traced all the way to the book of Isaiah, which reads,

3 Do not let the foreigner joined to the Lord say, ‘The Lord will surely separate me from his people’; and do not let the eunuch say, ‘I am just a dry tree.’ 4 For thus says the Lord: To the eunuchs who keep my sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant, 5 I will give, in my house and within my walls, a monument and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off.[6]

This passage in Isaiah, which comes from a section of the book that was likely composed sometime during the early Second Temple period, is profoundly significant. Although a eunuch is unable to engage in sexual intercourse, the prophet assures him that his observance of Sabbath is cherished by God. The underlying presumption here, I would argue, is that sexual activity is an integral part of the experiential joy of Shabbat. This explains why the eunuch is cited as complaining that he is a “dry tree.” His complaint is that, as a eunuch, he cannot celebrate the Sabbath to its fullest, most pleasurable extent with a partner.

The eunuch’s complaint is coupled with the concern of the foreigner, who is concerned that he too, cannot fully participate in the covenantal community, because he does not possess Jewish familial roots. To these complaints, which both regard the question of genealogical and physical connection to the covenantal community, the prophet offers this answer: God cares not about the identity of one’s familial connections; God cares only about whether the person in question is devoted to God’s service. Intimacy on Shabbat

Or this one:

Furthermore, intimacy is encouraged on Shabbat not so much as a means to procreate as it is to create a bond between husband and wife. There are two separate mitzvot in the Torah that involve sexual relations. One is to be fruitful and multiply (Genesis1:28.) The lesser-known mitzvah is for the husband to ensure he sexually satisfies his wife (Exodus 21:10). This second mitzvah is totally independent from the first and so the obligation to make love to one’s wife applies to couples regardless as to whether they wish to, or are capable of conceiving.

The very notion that sexual pleasure can itself — provided it is experienced in the right context — be a mitzvah, underscores the unique Jewish attitude to life. Judaism, on the whole, frowns upon asceticism. It sees the material world not in conflict with sanctity but rather as capable of being sanctified. Nowhere is this more evident than on Shabbat where the sacred is celebrated through the physical. This holy day is observed not just through prayer and song but also through eating, socialising, relaxing and — for married couples — sexual intimacy. Shabbat illustrates the harmony that can be achieved between the spiritual and the physical.

Throughout the week we live fragmented lives lurching between high ideals and practical realities; on Shabbat we attain a sense of wholeness, where the disparate and often opposing forces in our lives meld together in celebration of this special day of rest. Why is Sex Allowed on Shabbat

Even the Seventh Day Adventists agree that sex is ok on the Sabbath:

Sabbath is a holy day and Marriage is a holy institution therefore sex can be done on the Sabbath: The supporters of this view contend that both the Sabbath and Marriage were instituted by God and as such sex is definately sacred, especially since God only sanctioned sex in the institution of marriage. They further argue that the Apostle Paul gave strong support for sex on the Sabbath when he said: "Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency" 1 Cor 7:5. The argument is that couples are not required to fast and pray every Sabbath. Some even go as far as to say that since Adam and Eve were married on the sixth day, God would not require them to wait that long before consummating their marriage.

As an order of priority, the activities of the Sabbath should be ones that bring honor to God, ones that promote a spiritual and holy encounter. Since sex is an expression of love, it believe that a spouse may have the need to share his/her love for his wife/husband on the Sabbath. While I would not encourage couples to reserve sex just for the Sabbath, I would also like to encourage those who believe otherwise, to reserve judgment to God. If you feel it is wrong to engaging in sexual activities on the Sabbath, then by all means, avoid doing so, but do not stand in judgment of someone else.

An intimate relationship between a married couple is a spiritual relationship. Marriage is a holy institution; the Sabbath is a holy day. One might ask, if holy people, participate in a holy institution, sanctioned by a Holy God, on a holy day, could that act be Unholy? That's for you to decide!Should married couples have sex on the sabbath?

Why would ANY Church of God member in 2018 ever let some hypocritical, self-appointed and self-serving Church of God leader tell them what to do? Particularly one who bastardizes the law over the opportunity to revel in grace.I am not a fan of 7th Day Adventist's or particularly Ellen G White, but what she had to say about the Sabbath is spot on:

As Ellen White so passionately put it, “The Sabbath–oh!–make it the sweetest, the most blessed day of the whole week.” – White, Ellen G. The faith I Live By. p 36

30 comments:

Hypothetically speaking, the sabbath when you are rested up is probably the one time of the week when you could have the best sex! It’s 24 hours in which a loving couple could go at it, oh maybe 5 times.

The funniest thing about all of this is that a newlywed WCG member once told me that what he liked best about sex in a spiritual sense was that the sex act could be seen as symbolic of God sending forth the Holy Spirit into Christians, the bride of Christ. I wonder if James Malm has ever entertained that possibility. If he has, then he’d realize that you’d want to indulge in intimacy especially on the sabbath.

Maybe your example works in mainstream Christian congregations, but the ACOG ministry does not really believe that God has given non-ministers enough of the Holy Spirit to function without ministerial guidance. To properly picture the ACOG understanding of the Holy Spirit, you would need a threesome -- the husband and wife, plus another man to picture the minister sharing his extra portion of the Spirit with the husband.

Alternatively, if you want to picture David Pack, Gerald Flurry or Rod Meredith sharing their guidance and knowledge with the brethren, just masturbate. It feels good to the giver, but doesn't do anyone else any good.

Malms gone off the boil. The Israelites cleansed themselves because God himself was visiting the mountain to give the law to Moses. The is absolutely no direct commands from God to either refrain or participate in marital sex in scripture on the Sabbath or Holy days. It is strange thinking to go down this road.Malm wants to give his head a wobble and rethink this.

Synoptic Jesus is an extreme ascetic. If anyone were ever to have ever taken his word for it ever, HWA, and none of the ministers in the Armstrongist movement are anywhere in the neighborhood of making through the "eye" of that "needle." (Did I remember to say ever?) They, extreme ascetic James Malm included, have never given all they had to the poor. In fact, they have manfestly always done the polar opposite of that, demand that poor people give to them instead.

Nevertheless, the christian movement has always been ascetic when it comes to sex, even if they've steadfastly refused to follow the rest of synoptic Jesus' acetic teachings. If it weren't necessary for the survival of christianity and the human species, it's not too much of a stretch to imagine that catholicism in particular could have demanded, based upon Matthew 19:11-12, celibacy for everyone, not just clergy. In fact, the catholic church from the start right through the middle ages wanted nothing to do with the concession to sex that is marriage, they didn't see matrimony as holy, they didn't sanction or license them, and they wouldn't allow weddings to be performed in churches. Consequently, marriage was, until relatively recently, a civil matter, not a religious one. It was only as their power began to fade that they realized that taking over marriage provides an extra controlling hook parishioners' lives and a source of revenue for their dwindling coffers.

So it's no surprise then that Malm, while soliciting handouts on the one hand, should hypocritically try to enforce other biblical asceticisms. And while I don't predict he'll make himself a eunuch anytime soon, if he did, I don't think any of us should be too surprised.

Even less surprising would be if he just demanded that others do so, while special pleading that he should be granted an exception. In fact, it's almost more surprising that he hasn't already done this.

It is NO ONE'S BUSINESS to meddle into a couple's private life for ANY reason. Not Malm, not a minister, not a church,nor family nor friend - nobody. What a couple decides to do and when someone decides to do private things is a private matter between them and God. NO ONE has any business or right to begin to try to tell people what to do in the most intimate area of their lives.

Anyone who allows such people to meddle isn't standing up for the rights of their marriage and family, or for the good of their relationship.

If a minister tries to meddle, asks questions, or does something to "check" if you're observing "the Law" properly in this regard.... it's none of their business, and you have the right to not answer that question. It's between you and your spouse and God.

The Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 did not make it a requirement that Gentiles abide by the regulations of cleanness and uncleanness. So the requirement being imposed here is not a demand of the NT but a matter of manner and custom - or church administration.

Someone may prohibit sex under certain conditions because it is a matter of physical uncleanness (the OT has such a regulation). Someone else may encourage sex under these same conditions because of the symbolic or spiritual meaning it reflects. Neither viewpont has decisive support from scripture that I can see. Neither viewpoint is more than a viewpoint.

Where regulation of sex becomes an alarming issue is if this is being done to exert control. David Koresh imposed sexual regulations on his followers. He dissolved all the marriages and he had free and unfettered access to everyone's ex-wives and daughters. He found purported justification in the Bible for this. He may have been simply lustful but I doubt it. I think he was testing the obedience of his followers.He wanted them all to drink the kool-aid periodically and over many issues to intensify their submission to him. It seemed to have worked. Many of his people followed him to death.

Another issue is if this viewpoint is given theological standing such as claiming that since such a prohibition was in the OT that it is binding on Christians today. That would be a blatant heresy.

"@ 2:40 PM, you have apparently never been "counseled" by Rod McNair. Answer, or get booted out of the church!"

I'd be out the door before his boot would even be raised. The only power the powerless have is to deceive you into thinking they have power. The only power they have is what you give them. If a church tries to invade every aspect of your life including what happens between the sheets, then being booted out would probably be, in the long term, the best thing that could happen.

And then, you think, "why in the heck did I give Rod McNair so much power?" And then contemplate exactly that statement and realize the truth of it. I think all of us that have departed from the COG's have come to ask those same questions about those who were ministers "over" us.

The reality is, the worst they can ever do is tell you to leave. Then, you, perhaps for the first time, can begin your new path and use the brain you have been blessed with for good, without the burdens, the guilt - and you get thirty percent more of your money to take care of your spouse and kids. No, it's not easy. Yes, it's traumatic. Yes, you will lose your friends. Yes, there are serious hurdles to work through, some, for a very very long time. But as they say in the field of medicine - "the benefits outweigh the risks". And what follows is for those who believe in God:

- yes, He still loves you, and NO, you're not going to be destroyed spiritually for leaving a controlling and burdening physical organization. Anyone who thinks or believes OR preaches that that does not understand the power of love or the depth of God's grace, or know the Gospel. He who began a good work in you will be faithful to complete it.

I have to respond to an old post that we already galloped by. Humor me, please. A couple of topics ago (Diehl on Kennewick), a post from Anonymous supporting the idea that the flood happened around 4,500 BC provided a link that indicated that there was a change in races in Europe around 4,500 BC.

I reviewed the article on the Live Science website and it was interesting but in no way supported the idea of a global flood. What happened was that around 4,500 BC, haplogroup H people were replaced in Western Europe by the people we find in Europe now - haplogroups R1a, R1b, I and G. But the haplogroup H people are still very much around. They did not perish in a global flood. All this was, was a population displacement. Like the Europeans running the Native Americans out of the eastern part of North America.

Pardon me for brining this up again but I could not let it go unanswered.

If they have pretend authority, then it's a pretend church. And if you spend your time at a pretend church who issues pretend prophecies while standing at a lectern with their pretend authority, and you sit there and take it warming a seat, then all the pretending isn't just pretending. It's affecting in a very real way your life for something out of the Neighborhood of Make Believe.

The verbally bashing and the verbally tearing down is abuse, and it's wrong. One needs to think about why they do this. Is it power? Is it to maintain control over your life? Is it to ensure you're always submissive? I think it's all of those things. But the main thing I think it is has to do with what HWA has always said - government.

That desire to rule, to control, to own you, while using scriptures to justify and feed their thirst for power, is combined with the lust and control of money to produce what can only be called pure wickedness. The deceptive "spell" they put you in there which forces you into your chair to just sit there and "take it" is classic abuse techniques. The abused always feel helpless against the abuser.

When you realize just how wicked the whole thing is - using scriptures and the name of God in cunning and deceptive ways, claiming it's God's way while lives are piece by piece being slowly destroyed - it's a slow, depressing, and painful path where the carrot is always dangling in front of the horse's mouth. And when the promises that are constantly promised do not appear because they honestly always get it wrong, what happens is disillusionment, hopelessness, despair, and eventually a move to agnosticism and atheism.

Yes, you're right. They do exactly what you said they do. Bash you, tear you down, and control you. Sadly, most COG'ers who endure the wrath and cunning deception of seasoned COG ministers just sit there, take it, and then say the time old excuse:

8.07 PMNice write up except that you don't understand that people are often trapped and cannot escape for a variety of reasons. It's not as simple as walking away. There are many web sites on abuse, and I suggest you read up on the topic before condemning the victims.

This isn't unique to Armstrongism. If a baptized member of the JWs leave their church, their family members treat them like lepers. Suicide sometimes results. It's not as simple as you make out.

I apologize if it appeared I was condemning the victims. I do know that there are a lot of complications that can make the decision very difficult. I know many are trapped. I should have phrased it a little differently so it didn't lump everything and everyone together. Everyone has different circumstances. I was wrong, and apologize if it seemed cold and uncaring, and actually, callous. Absolutely no condemnation was intended.

I was one of the abused. I know the difficulties involved. So again, this came out a little broader, and colder than I had hoped, and for those who may have been offended at the tone or the implication, I hope you understand my intentions were not directed at your specific situation, simply meant to speak generally, which did not come out right at all.

Ever notice how old barren women give birth to important men in the Bible but young teen beauties give birth to gods? I suspect since gods are very busy during the week, 24/7 that Mary felt a slight "poof" signaling the inoculated conception either just after sunset on a Sabbath, when the gods tend also to rest or between services during Unleavened Bread 9 months before Christmas. So I think this answers the posting nicely. However, I could be mistaken. I wasn't there but there were rumors at the time.

I can understand not having sex on Atonement, or Passover, due to the solemn nature of those days. The thing is, considering how men were schooled in treating their wives in Armstrongism, how much sex was actually going on?

I don't know what the obsession is with what a person does or does not do in bed on the sabbath?! I know people in the Seventh Day Baptist & Church of God (Seventh Day) and I don't want to know if they are having Sabbath sex.